Original reporting on little-known U.S. government funded foreign aid projects, so-called "drug war" initiatives, and overseas business subsidies.

U.S. Senate

06/29/2014

While federal lawmakers increasingly try to address the nation’s fiscal worries, “taxpayers might still not see the relief they deserve” by the time Congress alternately slashes and adds to FY 2015 spending bills, one budget analyst has warned.

“Although the House is moving the fiscal needle in the right direction, it is difficult to know where that needle will point once final legislation reaches the president’s desk for a signature,” according to Pete Sepp, National Taxpayers Union executive vice president.

Sepp was asked if there is a disconnect between burdened taxpayers seeking relief and the elected officials who claim to be accomplishing that task.

For example, the U.S. House Committee on Appropriations has pledged to crack down on waste and corruption in foreign aid programs, but it gave the green light this week to send the multi-billion-dollar global gravy train down a track only slightly narrower than last year’s.

As part of the committee’s celebration of its perceived fiscal responsibility, it acknowledged that some of the slashed funds were simply shifted into “higher priority” programs.

08/20/2013

To many other conservatives (and liberals as well), the Obama administration's refusal to cut off foreign aid to Egypt initially was surprising if not insulting. How dare the president and his many Democratic and Republican supporters on this issue fail to take immediate action! Despite deposed Egyptian President Morsi's shortcomings, he was democratically elected, wasn't he? No wonder the Egyptians are rebelling.

Rather than reiterate the well-reasoned positions that conservative writers Andrew C. McCarthy and Thomas Sowell have taken on the situation, U.S. Trade & Aid Monitor urges readers to deeply explore the very convincing and eye-opening commentaries from these men.

Things are not what they seem in Egypt. Those who support the "democratically elected" Morsi do not share the American concept of democracy and freedom. Islamist radicals are attempting to retake the government, and it very well may be in U.S. national interests to steer far clear of this turmoil.

While congressional and White House debate over foreign aid in general and U.S. assistance to Egypt specifically is necessary (is there really a debate at the moment?), let's not be naive about what is happening in Egypt.

08/06/2013

Harpoon missile among weapons aboard patrol vessels

The U.S. Senate has rejected an effort to crack down on U.S. taxpayer
monies being forwarded to the violence-ridden nation of Egypt, and now
the Obama administration is preparing to send more heavily armed,
missile-equipped naval patrol ships to the interim government there.

For that purpose, Washington is hiring private contractors to make the transoceanic delivery on its behalf.

This shipment of Fast Missile Craft, or FMC, comes at a time when
congressional interest in suspending U.S. military aid to Egypt had
heated up – to the point there was a Senate proposal to cut it off. That
aid, according to federal law, must be suspended in response to
military coups.

But the White House refuses to designate the military overthrow of
deposed President Mohamed Morsi as a coup, and therefore has expressed
no more than a commitment to review U.S.-Egyptian aid.

The U.S. Senate last week shot down, 86-13, Sen. Rand Paul’s proposed amendment
to the transportation spending bill that would have redirected “certain
foreign assistance to the government of Egypt as a result of the July
3, 2013, military coup d’état.”

Paul specifically sought to shift some of those funds to critical domestic bridge projects.

The Senate’s rejection of the Paul amendment now leaves the
administration and its congressional supporters relatively free to
proceed with their plans, so long as funds are approved for the U.S.
Military Sealift Command endeavor.

Procurement documents
that WND located through routine database research show that the MSC is
now arranging to outsource the delivery of two of the advanced naval
craft, which the contractor will bring under its care somewhere “within
100 miles of Pensacola,” Fla.

According to a U.S. Navy description,
“The primary mission of the FMC is to conduct independent and joint
operations, primarily against armed surface adversaries” in and around
“coastal waterways of the Red Sea, Mediterranean Sea and, in particular,
the Suez Canal.”

FMC are equipped with a variety of missiles as well as a Close-In
Weapon System, which can detect and attack incoming anti-ship missiles.
Each vessel holds a crew of 40 personnel.

The Harpoon missiles can travel in excess of 67 miles with high subsonic speeds carrying nearly 500 pounds of explosives.

The beginnings of the FMC program precede the recent controversy over
the military coup. Indeed, the George W. Bush administration in 2003 first reached out to contractors in search of someone capable of executing the then-conceptual aid initiative for Egypt.

The U.S. Navy since has awarded over $800 million in contracts to VT
Halter Marine of Pascagoula, Miss., to carry out the Egypt FMC program.
One already has been delivered, and the company in March 2010 had
announced a $165 million contract to build a fourth FMC, slated for
delivery by the end of 2013.

The new document explicitly reveals that “Egyptian military”
personnel must be permitted to board and accompany the contractor
vessels when the massive cargo containers embark from Florida en route
to Alexandria, Egypt.

The inclusion of Egyptian military representatives, who will be
unarmed, is “to maintain cargo integrity for the voyage,” the
solicitation says.

Two cargo containers each 200 feet long with a combined hauling
capability of 1,600 metric tons will deliver FMCs to Egypt. Each FMC
must have a quarter-billion-dollar insurance policy, payable to the U.S.
government in the event of a disaster.

An MSC spokesperson said the solicitation documents that WND
discovered are exactly what the public affairs office possesses, and
therefore it is unable to offer more information.

“We just fulfill the charter” for the requested contractor ships, she said.

However, when pressed to elaborate on the project’s explicit plan to
have the Egyptian military board the contractor vessels for the entirety
of the voyage, the spokesperson referred WND’s inquiry to the
Department of Defense, specifically the Office of the Secretary of
Defense.

Pentagon spokesman Lt. Col. James Gregory told WND he had nothing to add to the information in the procurement documents.

The U.S. Department of Justice created EPIC in the ’70s primarily to
support U.S.-Mexico border and counternarcotics operations. The center
has since expanded its mission in support of law enforcement and
counterintelligence initiatives from the local- to international level.

EPIC will be tasked with approving – or disapproving – contractor shipping-crew members.

Although MSC set an August 15 contractor bid-submission deadline, the
solicitation emphasized that “funds are not currently available for
this procurement. In the event funds remain unavailable, this
procurement will be canceled without an award being made.”

In other Egypt-specific U.S. funding matters:

1) A $10 billion
aviation-support project at the U.S. Department of State continues work
with contractors on how the government may divvy up these awards through
the Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs, or
INL.

Although Egypt is not the sole focus of this endeavor – which had
been in the planning stages long before Morsi’s ouster – INL nonetheless
has been eying Egypt as a possible target for counterdrug operations. Current INL-contractor aviation activities are taking place in
Central Florida, Colombia, Bolivia, Peru, Pakistan, Afghanistan,
Guatemala, and Iraq, it says.

“However, it is anticipated that performance
may extend into other worldwide locations and the contractor(s) must be
able to quickly extend operations to new locations on short notice, for
limited duration. Recent examples of such include Sudan, Honduras,
Malta, Libya, and Egypt.”

2) The Naval Surface Warfare Center said it intends to award a no-bid
sole-source contract to Unified Industries, Inc., or UII, to train the
Egyptian Air Force, or EAF, in technical measurements and calibration.

UII will provide subject matter consultation to EAF Metrology
Engineering and Calibration Center, which is planning to build a
facility at the Cairo West Air Base in Cairo. The Navy did not disclose
an estimated contract cost.

3) The U.S. Agency for International Development, or USAID, extended
until August 15 the deadline for contractors to submit letters of
interest in a project to improve the Egyptian university system.

As U.S. Trade & Aid Monitor recently reported,
the USAID Higher Education Partnership Program hopes to bring together
the government of Egypt, Egyptian institutions of higher learning and
the private sector in a collaborative effort to meet the needs of this
North African nation’s business community.

A similar version of this article was published via WND.com Aug. 3, 2013. Under agreement with WND, rights have reverted back to its author, Steve Peacock.

08/05/2013

Contradictory claims of total dollar figures for U.S. foreign aid
circulate around the Internet, containing oft-repeated figures that may
or may not reflect reality. In response to those conflicting claims, WND
has compiled a list of significant U.S. aid totals based on a review of
congressional and Obama administration documents and databases.

As the debate often focuses on whether the U.S. receives, in
financial parlance, an adequate return on its investment, WND decided to
first focus on arguably the world’s greatest hot spot, the Middle
East/North Africa, or MENA, home to three of the top 10 recipients of
U.S. assistance: Israel, Egypt, and Jordan.

Though the aid totals are significantly less for Saudi Arabia and
Gaza/West Bank, we have included them due to the role that the Saudis
and Palestinians play on the MENA world stage.

08/03/2013

The U.S. Senate has rejected an effort to crack down on U.S. taxpayer
monies being forwarded to the violence-ridden nation of Egypt, and now
the Obama administration is preparing to send more heavily armed,
missile-equipped naval patrol ships to the interim government there.

For that purpose, Washington is hiring private contractors to make the transoceanic delivery on its behalf.

11/14/2012

One of the nation's most vociferous defenders of liberty and vocal opponent of big government has given his last goodbye on the floor of the House of Representatives: Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas). Among his many astute observations -- and warnings -- he left for the American people, the segment of his speech on liberty was among the most striking:

Liberty can only be achieved when government is denied the aggressive use of force. If one seeks liberty, a precise type of government is needed. To achieve it, more than lip service is required.

Two choices are available.

1. A government designed to protect liberty—a natural right—as its sole objective.The people are expected to care for themselves and reject the use of any force forinterfering with another person’s liberty. Government is given a strictly limitedauthority to enforce contracts, property ownership, settle disputes, and defendagainst foreign aggression.

2. A government that pretends to protect liberty but is granted power to arbitrarily use force over the people and foreign nations. Though the grant of power many times is meant to be small and limited, it inevitably metastasizes into an omnipotent political cancer. This is the problem for which the world has suffered throughout the ages. Though meant to be limited it nevertheless is a 100% sacrifice of a principle that would-be-tyrants find irresistible. It is used vigorously—though incrementally and insidiously. Granting power to government officials always proves the adage that: “power corrupts.”

Once government gets a limited concession for the use of force to mold people habits and plan the economy, it causes a steady move toward tyrannical government. Only a revolutionary spirit can reverse the process and deny to the government this arbitrary use of aggression. There’s no in-between. Sacrificing a little liberty for imaginary safety always ends badly.

Today’s mess is a result of Americans accepting option #2, even though the Founders attempted to give us Option #1.

08/17/2012

This coming Thursday (Aug. 23) I will appear as one of the guest speakers at the monthly open meeting of Ocean County Citizens for Freedom, a grassroots Tea Party group here on the New Jersey Shore. I will discuss my foreign aid-related research that I have published as an investigative reporter, particularly my recent findings here at U.S. Trade & Aid Monitor as well as at WND, The Revered Review, and Patriot Update. Among issues to be explored will be the refusal of Congress members to relinquish tainted campaign contributions from the political action committee of HSBC, the disgraced bank busted by the U.S. Senate for laundering money from Mexican drug lords and terrorist affiliates.

Time permitting, I also will share an uplifting experience I had as a concerned citizen investigating the Ocean County Freeholders -- an investigation that led both to frustrations as well as well as successes, notably in the area of opening up job opportunities at the Ocean County Security Department for non-politically connected citizens.

The event will be held at Jimmy C's, a restaurant and club located at 17 Washington Street, Toms River, NJ. The first speaker will have the floor beginning 7 pm, so get there early. The event is open to the public. If coming, consider letting the organizers know via MeetUp. -- Steve Peacock

08/15/2012

Media scrutiny of the HSBC money-laundering scandal has died down, but I am not letting Sen. Robert Menendez (D) -- who represents me here in New Jersey -- nor any other congressional recipients of the disgraced bank's political action committee's generosity off the hook.

Despite calling -- as a journalist -- the leadership of the House Financial Services and the Senate Banking committees, until today only one member responded. And the spokesman for that one leader (one of the few who has not gotten or taken a penny from the HSBC PAC in fifteen years) -- declined comment.The rest have remained steadfastly silent.

Today, however, Sen. Menendez had this to say in response to my questions, "In light of HSBC's dealing with Mexican drug lords and suspected Iranian terrorist supporters, what do you plan to do with the bank PAC donations you have received over the years? Will you reject future offers?"

Dear Mr. Peacock :

Thank you for contacting me regarding an issue with my re-election campaign.

As you may know, I am currently up for re-election to the United States Senate, with the election taking place on November 6, 2012. While I would like to respond to your inquiry, I am legally prohibited from discussing any activity related to a political organization, such as my re-election campaign, with official Senate resources. As such, I would encourage you to contact my campaign with your inquiry.

Again, thank you for sharing your thoughts with me. Please do not he sitate to contact me if I may be of further assistance. I invite you to visit my website http://menendez.senate.gov to learn more about how I am standing up for New Jersey families in the United States Senate.

Sincerely,

Robert Menendez, United States Senator

He says he cannot comment, yet tells me to contact his campaign for a comment? How frustrating. I will not accuse Menendez, however, of using the upcoming re-election campaign as an excuse to continue his silence, as indeed I am aware there are such restrictions as he claimed. Still, if the Menendez campaign remains mute on the matter through November, the senator risks jeopardizing what's left of his integrity and reputation.

The fallout from the HSBC money laundering scandal continues to reverberate around the globe, but U.S. Congress members apparently are in no hurry to return millions of dollars they have received from the scandal-plagued bank's political action committee.

U.S. Trade & Aid Monitor conducted an analysis of Federal Election Commission records specific to the company PAC's generosity toward Congress. The investigation centered upon two congressional panels with primary oversight of the industry: The Senate Committee on Banking, Housing & Urban Affairs, and the House Committee on Financial Services.

Since 1997, the earliest available FEC electronic records, HSBC bestowed its greatest beneficence upon the House panel’s leadership.

The bank’s direct contributions to individual leaders amounted to hundreds of thousands; however, HSBC’s financial support of the American Bankers Association PAC, or BANKPAC – plus many dozens of other financial, insurance, and law firm PACs for which HSBC provides funding – in turn donated millions of dollars to a handful of key members.

The Monitor offered two basic questions for committee leadership to answer:

In light of the U.S. Senate’s allegations that HSBC laundered billions, for example, from murderous Mexican drug cartels and rogue nations such as Iran, do you intend to return any of the funds received from HSBC?

Will you accept or reject future offers from the HSBC North America PAC?

In the few instances where leaders obtained zero or minimal HSBC funds, WND inquired whether the member had rejected or simply never had been offered donations.

The spokesperson of only one congressional leader – who declined to be identified – returned an e-mail to the Monitor. In that instance, the congressman, who received a small amount from HSBC several years ago, said he would rather not comment on the situation.

As of this deadline, the Monitor’s questions otherwise continue to be met with a wall of silence.

HSBC’s biggest financial beneficiary on the committees is Chairman Spencer Bachus, R-Ala., who since 1997 raked in $45,500 directly from the HSBC PAC. It most recently cut a $1,000 check for the Bachus for Congress Committee in November.

HSBC in May likewise donated $2,500 to the Financial Services Roundtable, a PAC that has given Bachus $33,499 from 1997 onward, including a $5,000 check in February.

Subcommittee Vice Chairman Jeb Hensarling, R-Texas, has reaped $34,500 from HSBC since 2002, last receiving $1,000 in September 2011. BANKPAC, however, donated $52,000 to his campaign in that same period.

Ranking Minority Member Barney Frank, D-Mass., directly received $21,000 since 2002 from HSBC, which in turn gave $42,500 to BANKPAC – which in turn donated a total of $48,250 back to Frank.

The following is a run-down solely of direct HSBC PAC donations to the respective House Committee on Financial Services subcommittee leaders:

Insurance, Housing and Community Opportunity Subcommittee

Chairman Judy Biggert, R-Ill.: $39,499 since 1998

Vice Chairman Robert Hurt, R-Va.: Single $1,000 payment on May 18, 2011

U.S. Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs leaders received significantly less than their House counterparts from HSBC. Chairman Tim Johnson, D-S.D., got $20,000 from the PAC since 1997.

While HSBC only gave $13,029 to Ranking Minority Member Richard Shelby since 1998, Shelby – who also serves as a senior member of the Senate Appropriations Committee – separately received millions during that period from a multitude of PACs in every imaginable industry sector.

The following is a run-down solely of direct HSBC PAC donations to the respective Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs subcommittee leaders:

Economic Policy Subcommittee

Chairman Jon Tester, D-Mont.: $1,000 in 2009

Ranking Minority Member David Vitter, R-La.: $3,000 since 2009

Housing, Transportation, and Community Development Subcommittee

Chairman Robert Menendez, D-N.J.: $9,000 since 2006

Ranking Minority Member Jim DeMint, R-S.C.: $1,000 in 2008

Financial Institutions and Consumer Protection Subcommittee

Chairman Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio: $0

Ranking Minority Member Bob Corker, R-Tenn.: $4,000 in 2008

Security and International Trade and Finance Subcommittee

Chairman Mark R. Warner, D-Va.: $8,500 since 1999

Ranking Minority Member Mike Johanns, R-Neb.: $0

Securities, Insurance, and Investment Subcommittee

Chairman Jack Reed, D-R.I.: $3,000 since 2010

Mike Crapo, R-Idaho: $16,000 since 2003

A spokesperson for the Center for Responsive Politics expressed concern about such linkages between industries such as the banking sector and members of Congress with jurisdiction over them.

Viveca Novak, CRP editorial and communications director, cautioned, however, against making a direct connection between contributions received and the perception of congressional favors granted.

“It creates at least the appearance of a conflict of interest when lawmakers running for re-election rely on contributions from the very companies they are supposed to be overseeing,” she said.

“Is this why Congress has such difficulty passing legislation that addresses some of the questionable practices of banks and others? There’s not a straight line between cause and effect, but there are grounds for raising questions about a link.”

Alluding to the Monitor’s questioning of House and Senate committee members about what their plans are for the campaign contributions, Novak said CRP is not taking a position “on what should be done with the donations already given.”

A similar version of this article first was published via WND.com on July 29.